Crisis in Idlib is mainly due to US regime which supports “Al Qaeda safe haven” there. “Humanitarian” aid to Idlib is de facto terrorist aid, crosses Turkish border and is easily diverted by US-backed Islamic jihadists, many of whom aren’t Syrian-Helena Cobban, lobelog.com

Since 2011, Turkey has suffered considerable blowback from that regime-change campaign against Syria. Much of this blowback came from the Kurdish forces—Washington’s recent allies—who are centered in the northeast of Syria. They are closely tied to the anti-Ankara insurgents of the Turkish-Kurdish “PKK” who have long been active across eastern Turkey. But Turkey has also sufferedblowback from several of the border-straddling pro-al-Qaeda networks whose anti-Assad activities in Syria Turkish security services have often very actively aided.

In Idlib, under the agreement Turkey and Russia concluded last September, Turkey is supposed to go into the troubled province and end the takfiris’ control of the area. Until that control ends one way or another, the noncombatants of Idlib will continue to suffer. But it is completely impossible to understand the plight of Idlib’s noncombatants or the broader geopolitics of what is happening in Syria unless journalists and others clearly describe the power dynamics within the rebel-held territory.”

The very name of Hayat Tahrir al-Cham – which means “Liberation Organization of the Levant” – indicates that its objective is not only to overthrow the Syrian Arab Republic but to put an end to the governments of all the countries of the Levant, which covers the region of Anatolia (in Turkey), Israel, Jordan and Mesopotamia (in Iraq), in addition to Syria. This jihadist group is the direct heir of the old “Front al-Nusra” (“Front for the Victory of the People of the Levant”) that had sworn allegiance to al-Qaeda.

Americans are being told that the virtuous course in Syria is to fight the Assad regime and its Russian and Iranian partners. We are supposed to hope that a righteous coalition of Americans, Turks, Saudis, Kurds, and the “moderate opposition” will win.

This is convoluted nonsense, but Americans cannot be blamed for believing it. We have almost no real information about the combatants, their goals, or their tactics. Much blame for this lies with our media.

Much important news about the world now comes from reporters based in Washington. In that environment, access and credibility depend on acceptance of official paradigms. Reporters who cover Syria check with the Pentagon, the State Department, the White House, and think tank “experts.” After a spin on that soiled carousel, they feel they have covered all sides of the story. This form of stenography produces the pabulum that passes for news about Syria.

Inevitably, this kind of disinformation has bled into the [2016] American presidential campaign. At the recent debate in Milwaukee, Hillary Clinton claimed that United Nations peace efforts in Syria were based on “an agreement I negotiated in June of 2012 in Geneva.”

Politicians may be forgiven for distorting their past actions. Governments may also be excused for promoting whatever narrative they believe best suits them. Journalism, however, is supposed to remain apart from the power elite and its inbred mendacity. In this crisis it has failed miserably.